How will Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) differ from traditional fuels?

As far as passengers or pilots are concerned, there are absolutely no differences between the two fuels. They have the exact same chemical compositions and meet all safety requirements. SAFs are drop-in fuels – meaning they can go directly into existing aviation infrastructure and engines at any blended proportion. Currently, the allowable ASTM standard only permits up to a 50 percent blend but we are eager to see that percentage increase. 

What sets SAF apart from traditional fossil jet fuel is the source of the carbon atoms in the fuel molecule – SAF uses renewable carbon. At Gevo, we will use carbohydrates taken from plants as raw materials to make SAF. One of the important aspects of most SAF is the lower carbon intensity (CI) they have versus traditional fuels, to keep that carbon intensity score low, our new facility is expected to be powered entirely by renewable energy. To ensure that the carbon score is properly accounted for, we will count the carbon from the farm field to the production plant to the airline fuel purchase. Not only will we be creating a fuel that will help the airlines lower their carbon score and that of their passengers, but our production process also enables us to create high-value animal feed and oil from the parts of the plant we’re not using for SAF. Finally, and this is something we’re incredibly proud of because we use plants, the crops from American farmers become the primary source of the fuel to fly airplanes. We don’t need to look overseas for oil, we get to help farmers throughout the Midwest by drastically increasing demand for their crops, which will result in more money in their pockets and enhance the local communities where they live in the Midwest. 

Can you tell us about your work with Delta when it comes to SAFs, and the appetite from the industry side?

Major airlines started shifting their attention toward sustainable aviation fuels a couple of years ago when many of them voluntarily made net zero 2050 goals. The overall sentiment from consumers is that Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are a major factor in climate change, which is paramount because we cannot just wish fossil fuels away – systemic change must take place.

When it comes to SAF, Delta signed a take-or-pay offtake agreement with Gevo for 75 million gallons of SAF per year for seven years. Since then, we’ve also signed agreements with additional airlines such as American Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Finnair, British Airways, Japan Airlines and others to supply low carbon intensity (CI) SAF. 

How far along are you with the Net-Zero 1 (NZ1) production facility in Preston, South Dakota?

We just broke ground for the Net-Zero 1 facility in the middle of September and the Lt. Governor of South Dakota, Larry Rhoden stated this will be the largest economic investment in South Dakota history. It will take $800 million or so to build the NZ1 facility and an additional $120 million for our partner Juhl Energy to build a 99 MW wind farm that will provide NZ1 with renewable electricity. The wind is one of the reasons we chose the location, by relying on wind power we further reduce the carbon intensity of our fuel. But that’s not all. We have already built a biogas facility in Iowa that captures methane from the manure from dairy farms. Once NZ1 is built, we expect to provide a portion of the thermal energy we need for our fermentation process from this source. We expect – and are committed – to producing SAF from Net-Zero 1 in 2025.

How are you combating the negative press agriculture has harnessed in recent years when it comes to GHG emissions?

Agriculture has a bad reputation globally, and many think it is almost as bad as fossil fuels. But this depends on the methods the growers use. Farmers know their land and we find they are interested in the use of sustainable agriculture, low-till and no-till techniques, that leave the root systems intact year to year, allow the farmer to reduce expenses on chemicals, and build up soil carbon. This makes their product more valuable to us, and we intend to pay them a premium for it. For agriculture, the question is not how much capital and operating costs are in the business system, but how much they contribute to reducing the overall CI score of the whole business system. When you look at it that way, all the energy and effort that go into making the fuel is sustainable.

How will your track and trace technologies contribute to the biofuels sector development?

Early on, we recognized the inherent challenge of both ensuring that we were accounting for every single molecule of carbon, but also guaranteeing that we can account for our products from field to flight. That’s why we are developing Verity Tracking, a blockchain system to collect, track and verify all the data necessary to ensure our low carbon intensity SAF has an immutable record of that score. We just got a grant from the USDA for up to $30 million, to work with partners like Google and further develop the techniques and perfect the system. If we are producing biofuels, and we care about producing and improving protein, we need to measure the carbon intensity of every unit we sell. Only then can we continue to improve our processes and reduce their impacts.

The idea that we are locked into what has been done in the past is simply not true. We now have economic reasons to drive carbon intensity scores down, and we intend to set a standard for disclosure and lead the industry with scientific measurement and verification.

We know that farmers will want to report their data and we will continue to find ways to make this happen. The more data farmers can report, the more value their crops have in creating low carbon intensity SAF. At Gevo, we want our customers to have absolute certainty in the carbon score of our products, and that starts right with the farmer working his/her field.